WHO IS SEVAKRAM

[shivsena]

rmn Bhai.....Sevakram is a fictitious character created by Virendra Dev Dixit to fool the PBKs....i request you not go into the details of this sevakram, otherwise you will be just wasting your precious time, which should be devoted to study of Murlis-Vanis.

[sita]

Surely Sevakram is as true person from history as Brahma Baba and has been his partner.There are attempts to reveal as much as possible what has happened in the Yagya and such questions do inspire.

[rmn]

My dear worrier/PBK thank for u r reply.. it is not a earthquake it real question how to send private message i do not know pl tell me.. why private messages let the truth should come in front of all//why u afraid.

[shivsena]

Surely Sevakram is as true person from history as Brahma Baba and has been his partner.There are attempts to reveal as much as possible what has happened in the Yagya and such questions do inspire.

If sevakram is as important a character that PBKs make him to be, then why it has never been mentioned in the Murlis ??

[Abhimanyu]

If sevakram is as important a character that PBKs make him to be, then why it has never been mentioned in the Murlis ??

Knowledge is also a test. If test paper is declared beforehand then it has no meaning. Only the special children of God will pass that test, i.e. PBKs.

[warrior]

My dear worrier/PBK thank for u r reply.. it is not a earthquake it real question how to send private message i do not know pl tell me.. why private messages let the truth should come in front of all//why u afraid.

I said - send me the questions here or via PM whatever suits you. To send PM is easy also, you must log in to do so.

I wrote to you:

Can you kindly post me a private message or direct here what are your questions?

Why are you making a drama out of it, just send me the questions, no one is afraid. Or maybe you are afraid to ask or to know the very truth? I bet that the earth will shake under your feet.... :laugh: just joking ...

[fluffy bunny]

This is interesting but should probably fit into the history topic. From The Times of India on April 27 1939, from the now banned by the BKWSU Brahma Kumaris Research website which has a few old newspaper cuttings and documents.

Who was the principle male member who had left the Om Mandli by this time?

I understand the way the PBKs tell the story, the Shevakram character left early out of disagreement with Lekhraj Kirpalani and his God Krishna fantasy indulgences. The BKs continue to deny the existence of him and whitewash their history.

The Times of India April 27 1939
Om Mandli Life Criticised
Sind Tribunal's Findings
Karachi, April 26

That the Om Mandli is an unhealthy institution whose doctrines are not conducive to sound moral life among the young inmates is believed to the the unanimous conclusion of the tribunal appointed by the Sind Government. The members of the tribunal were Mr C. B. Lobo, Judicial Commissioner and Dewan Bahadur Kalumal, ex-Chief Judge of the Small Causes Court. Their report is under the consideration of Government.

The tribunal is understood to have expressed the opinion that the basis of the Mandli rests on half-baked ideas, crude principles and the alleged practice of hypnotism by the founder of the Mandli, Dad Lekhraj, which tended to weaken will-power and introduced a baneful form of psychological perversion among the young inmates.

Meanwhile, it is stated that one of the principle male members has already left the Mandli while another is shortly leaving.

- Associated Press.

[mbbhat]

With reference to above post of fluffy bunny -
viewtopic.php?f=39&t=2579&start=15#p49740

So, this (the one who has left) was on or before 1939. But, Guru of PBKs say- Sevakram left Yagya in 1942.

And, we have also seen a great error in one of the newspaper report about date of birth of DL [It was mentioned age of DL was 42 in 1936/37]. The report of news papers (such news) need not be accurate. They may simply put so to make their accusations look strong.

The main point is- if Sevakram had been head (as PBKs claim*) of Yagya till 1942, why is his name and photo not mentioned in the documents recovered from British library? Why all the allegations were on DL and Om Radhe? Unless this is solved, it will not become worthy proof.

One of the PBKs writes- here- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... Ram#p15000

Sevakram continued with his business and had 6 or 7 children. One of them died last year

So, was Sevakram also doing business when he was in Yagya? Or after he left Yagya (in 1939 or 1942..) he continued business ? ...

* - viewtopic.php?f=2&t=632&p=39535&hilit=1942#p39535

Time: 36.10-37.17
Student: Baba, the soul of Sevakram had left its body in 1942; after that Shiv entered Brahma Baba in 1947; so, where was the Supreme Soul Shiv for 4, 5 years?

Baba: Why? Has it not been said in the Murli ‘he who lived together for 10 years; she used to go into trance; Baba used to enter them. They used to give directions. They used to play a part.’? So, were they two or one? So, the one who has been described in the form of a woman; there was a mother too who used to control the entire Yagya; she used to control even Mama Baba. They used to give directions even to Mama Baba. This is why it has been said in the Murli, ‘Actually even this Brahma Saraswati are not your Mama Baba**. Why was it said so? It is because there were some souls who used to control even Mama and Baba in the beginning of the Yagya.

** - This claim is found faulty and has already been addressed in this forum as well as here- post No. 112 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... &start=150.

But, thank you for the information which is highly relevant to the topic.

[fluffy bunny]

... The main point is- if Sevakram had been head (as PBKs claim*) of Yagya till 1942, why is his name and photo not mentioned in the documents recovered from British library? Why all the allegations were on DL and Om Radhe? Unless this is solved, it will not become worthy proof.

Firstly, you appear to have missed one salient point. It seems there were two individuals with the name Sevakram and some confusion arises from this. Confusion rooted in the Brahma Kumaris bogus comic book history.

(I mean that literally, not as an insult. I refer to an early comic book version of the history that the BKs created and which mentions *one* of the Sevakrams. In his seeking of the truth, it appears to have influenced Virendra Dev Dixit and his understanding of the history. It seems to me that intuitively he felt something was wrong or incomplete, but that less factually information existed at that time and he had to go with what he trusted to be the truth, but was wrong.).

Now the BKWSU denies Sevakram's existence altogether to academics etc, presumably as part of their war against the PBKs?

Secondly, the partner Sevakram *was* mentioned in the documents in the British Library, but that partner of Lekhraj Kirpalani had already left. He gave a witness report to the fact that, "Lekhraj Kirpalani was not a moral man".

Your logical construction regarding media reports is terribly weak and deliberately misleading. You refer to one report where the British Daily Mail of the day may have reported his age erroneously as use that as a foundation to suggest *all* media reports *might* be wrong. That's ridiculous.

Lekhraj Kirpalani was 52 in 1936 when the BK *claim* Shiva entered him (it's likely the Daily Mail error was a simple typo ... 42 for 52).

Now, we discovered the Om Mandli started in 1932 when he was 48 or 72 when Shiva was finally revealed ... and yet the Murli clearly states "60".

So who was 60?

We know Lekhraj Kirpalani's date of birth now. Some PBKs actually made the effort to acquire his birth certificate, the BKs could have revealed it in a click of finger but chose not to do so.

Of course, it prove that the Brahma Kumaris had falsified his age for decades claiming that he was 60 when Shiva entered him. This is absolutely wrong depending on whether you take 1932 or 1955 (approx) as the year when the Shiva soul entered him.

Again, the BKWSU's falsification is likely to have been part of their information war against Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs who, rather than re-write and falsify the history, have attempted to reconcile the contradicting fact.

Personally, I don't think the PBKs have got it 100% factually correct yet either, but they are making more efforts to do so, whereas the BKWSU is acting to suppress the truth.

[mbbhat]

Firstly, you appear to have missed one salient point. It seems there were two individuals with the name Sevakram and some confusion arises from this. Confusion rooted in the Brahma Kumaris bogus comic book history.

I believe Sevakram is name of partner of B baba. [Because it is mentioned in the comic book. Also, in the B Baba's shop at Calcutta, (a photo had been put in the forum), it was shown as "Lakhiraj and Sevakram and Sons"- something like that]

I also believe at present that there was also another person in the same name in anti Om Mandli. I saw that too in the forum (mostly the "Is this justice" report.)

In his seeking of the truth, it appears to have influenced Veerendra Dev Dixit and his understanding of the history.

For me, it is not seeking of truth. It is just manipulations to facilitate propagation of own theory, to carry out the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya, accurately, as per Drama Plan. Lots of evidence is put in the forum by many members.

Now the BKWSU denies Sevakram's existence altogether to academics etc, presumably as part of their war against the PBKs?

I am not sure whether BKWSU deny existence of Sevakram now, may be not bothered about him. But, even if they deny, it may not be wrong or it is no surprise. Because why should they bother about Sevakram? Only PBKs are interested in him, for reason indicated above.

Secondly, the partner Sevakram *was* mentioned in the documents in the British Library, but that partner of Lekhraj Kirpalani had already left. He gave a witness report to the fact that, "Lekhraj Kirpalani was not a moral man".

DL was said to be a moral man by some others. So, some others may say something else. These are all human perceptions. OK, let us accept he was not moral. (ShivBaba had already declared that he was impurest of all, and then becomes the purest of all)! Hence, nothing wrong with human perceptions at all!
Now, do you believe B baba's lowkik business partner Sevakram had left Yagya by 1939 itself? Do you believe he was head of Yagya till then only?

So, the main point is- Whether God had entered in Sevakram, and he had been head of Yagya and had controlled the entire Yagya, with the two other female sisters, ... blah, blah, blah (already said to you). Moreover, why no mention of Sevakram or the two mothers in the trust? (if they were controlling the entire Yagya as claimed by head of PBKs)

Sorry for repetition- Why all the court cases were handled by Mama and B baba? Moreover all got visions of DL and not Sevakram, is it not? All the children were attracted to B Baba, not Sevakram, is it not? All the news paper reports talk about DL as the leader and not sevakram, is it not?

So, my point was- just a mention of name Sevakram is not enough.

Your logical construction regarding media reports is terribly weak and deliberately misleading. You refer to one report where the British Daily Mail of the day may have reported his age erroneously as use that as a foundation to suggest *all* media reports *might* be wrong. That's ridiculous.

I just added it like you many times argue in such ways. You need not take it in the sense your perceive personally.

But, news papers sometimes comment anything about anyone, especially in India. [Even western media is criticized for its biased reports]. And, there is absolutely no surprise if news papers say something negative about Om mandli as it was new. So, my point was- just when some news paper says- some senior male member has left Om mandli, it need not be true. Even if it is true, the claim again goes to stand still, for reason already mentioned above. [No one else other than DL and Mama were seen as leaders of Om mandli].

So who was 60?

I am yet to understand dance of ShivBaba or the way ShivBaba speaks. But, I have already put the Murli points (even Avyakt Murlis) which strongly points the Chariot as only DL, and no one else. So, if you like to take Murli points, take fully, why only half? [Put in post No. 84- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... &start=110 ]

We know Lekhraj Kirpalani's date of birth now. Some PBKs actually made the effort to acquire his birth certificate, the BKs could have revealed it in a click of finger but chose not to do so.

False allegations. When BKs were not bothered about DOB, why should they work on that? More over for PBKs, their very foundation is on these manipulated so-called facts and figures. So, in this way, they may be compelled or tempted to do all these things. This was said to you many times, not new. Those who have time to waste on such matters are free to do so, if it gives them a sense of limited satisfaction and joy.
These matters are totally insignificant and absolutely meaningless to those who are already experiencing unlimited satisfaction and joy, based on their present actual personal experience of correct understanding of the Knowledge and accurate unadulterated remembrance of ShivBaba!

Again, the BKWSU's falsification is likely to have been part of their information war against Veerendra Dev Dixit

As per drama, or karmic account between BKs and PBKs, this has occurred. What to do? Mistakes are there from both sides. Now, time only will reveal more things in future. All occurrences withing Drama are benevolent, but those with limited vision cannot perceive same to be so, and therefore get trapped in the bog of Maya.
See a Murli point here- Baba says conflicts in brahmin family - Post No. 151 - http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... cts#p13165

It is Bk/PBK/ex-BK/exPBK souls who first commit sins with themselves. So, that karmic account may be the reason for the present conflicts.

Personally, I don't think the PBKs have got it 100% factually correct yet either, but they are making more efforts to do so, whereas the BKWSU is acting to suppress the truth.

BKWSU is not interested in such silly truth. Who has questioned about DOB of DL? Any worldly person or PBKs? (First) PBKs, is it not?

Was not duty of PBKs to take the Murli points fully (instead of taking just isolated ones, and doing one sided arguments) if they are honest truth seekers? They just do copy and paste of what is said to them in AIVV without doing any individual churning, and are committing progressive blunders. But, of course, as per Drama, this has to be so. No one can be blamed for same.

Moreover, they go the extent to misuse or misinterpret the Murli points to ANY LEVEL. Can that be called as right effort? But, again, all as per Drama, so no one can be blamed. All are playing their predestined roles accurately!

Let us see how drama goes. Anyhow, we all will be in Paramdham together and also will be in heaven at least for few births. So, all the best and thank you. So why not, sit back, relax, and ENJOY!

[fluffy bunny]

I believe Sevakram is name of partner of B Baba ...

I am not really interested in beliefs any more. I want facts.

One partner of Lekhraj Kirpalani was called Sevakram and did take sides with the Bhaibund Om Mandli committee out of concern. I'd say a business partner has a greater insight into an individual's personality than people who only knew him casually (... some of the worst criminals are the most charming and charismatic people you'll meeting). It could be the same person as the PBKs reference ... I don't know. It would help if some BKs could ask the remaining old timers and get thet ruth out of them for once as to who this other gentleman was.

I am intrigued as to why he wrote such a think *under oath* for the court.

It was not just a passing comment, it was in an official affidavit.

At that time, the Indian papers were British papers (we are talking about broadsheets like The Times etc) and, arguably, in their prime. It was a time when journalism (accuracy/attempts at objectivity meant something. The Daily Mail is a tabloid and not so strong.

Om Mandli was no big thing for them, just a tiny sideshow as WWII erupted. I'd believe their account far more than the Brahma Kumaris own, especially as not just their version's credibility has been shot to pieces but their ability to deal with factual history is proven to be near zero (see, the comment here).

mbbhat, I know you've developed a series of mental yuktis to protect and sustain your blind faith from any reasonable doubt and questioning. You've chosen to play your cards and bet your life on the BKs. Luckily for you, they could argue 'white is black' one day and 'black is white' the next and you'd just respond with joy and excitement, "Wah, Drama!" etc.

I suppose your life without the BKs would be so meaningless that you're willing to do so, even well beyond the point of reasonable doubt. But why not join with those BKs and PBKs who are trying to discover the real and actual facts, and support them? Is the reality of your own religion not interesting to you?

Virendra Dev Dixit could well be a Sevakram reincarnate. I have no idea, we have no way of proving it one way or another.

But ... 'pot calling the kettle black', or 'people in glass houses throwing stones' ... I don't think any BK has the right to accuse anyone else of just making stuff up as they too have made *so* much stuff up.

For me, Virendra Dev Dixit is just evidence of the BKs failure or inability to handle in depth questioning. The whole problem started when the Dadis would not answer his questions honestly.

Now we for a fact that they were not being honest. That the versions they were telling were all mixed up and fabricated. Had they been honest, perhaps Virendra Dev Dixit would have become the greatest BK devotee?

At the time, the BKs had chosen to invest in Jagdish Chander and his utter fabrications. It's turned out to be the downfall of what little credibility they might have.

[mbbhat]

One partner of Lekhraj Kirpalani was called Sevakram and did take sides with the Bhaibund Om Mandli committee out of concern.

If possible mention the proof. But then it becomes more difficult for PBKs. Because then there should be another business partner whose name is also Sevakram and be in Yagya for 5 years as head.

I'd say a business partner has a greater insight into an individual's personality than people who only knew him casually

But, sometimes even they will not hesitate to lie if at any point of time the relation breaks doen for some reason. So, again his words need not be true and could be malicious.

Baba has praised lowkik life of B baba considerably, but also one or two Murli points said in negative. One is- Jab tak graahak kaa jeb khaali naheen hotaa thaa, yah chodneyvaalaa naheen thaa = Till the pocket of the customer would not become empty, he(DL) was not going to leave him.

Anyhow, that (whether B baba was moral or not) has nothing to do for me as the reasons are already mentioned in the previous post. The topic here also is about Sevakram.

It was not just a passing comment, it was in an official affidavit.

Even the best relations when get spoiled due to any reason, people do not hesitate to speak lies or criticize or put false allegations.

mbbhat, I know you've developed a series of mental yuktis to protect and sustain your blind faith from any reasonable doubt and questioning.

Personal comments started again. These comments will not affect me even to a minutest extent.

I suppose your life without the BKs would be so meaningless that you're willing to do so, even well beyond the point of reasonable doubt. But why not join with those BKs and PBKs who are trying to discover the real and actual facts, and support them? Is the reality of your own religion not interesting to you?

You have only questions or expectations in your mind, and having no faith in anything.

Each one has significant role in drama. You have done a great job here in the forum. Even Shivsena Bhai as well as Arjun have put their views. Even myself have done something unique here. So, do it. Have I ever stopped or suppressed anyone from doing research?

Actually, the final aim is to sacrifice even title Bk. And become Subtle Region resident. BK life is just boat, not the goal. . By that time, I will be out of this forum and go to retirement stage.

Veerendra Dev Dixit could well be a Sevakram reincarnate. I have no idea, we have no way of proving it one way or another.

Which Sevakram? The one who joined to Anti Om Mandli? or....? Thank you for agreeing that there is no way to prove.

For me, Veerendra Dev Dixit is just evidence of the BKs failure or inability to handle in depth questioning. The whole problem started when the Dadis would not answer his questions honestly.

There is no need of Virendra Dev Dixit for that. Lots of questions have had come up in minds of BKs also. There are lots of Murli points which even no one has been able to tackle or understand. Many times Dadis will ask Avyakt BapDada some questions, but BapDada will say just drama, wait and see, or will tell about that later, etc.

You may please list what questions from Virendra Dev Dixit are relevant? And for how many questions or Murli points his answers are satisfactory - Can you list at least eight? or even two, three?

Had they been honest, perhaps Veerendra Dev Dixit would have become the greatest BK devotee?

So, do you now openly agree that no God enters in Virendra Dev Dixit and his main claims are wrong?

But, I believe his questions were useless. But, even myself was surprised initially by his way of questioning, and I had felt myself quite a number of times that- if he had raised questions honestly and believed in Bk philosophy, as like any other Bk, I would have openly given him the very next seat in mala after B Baba and Mama.

But, the greatest mistakes what AIVV had done was- they took even Avyakt Murli points to prove their stands, which have shown their total ignorance of the very basic of basics and have committed such blunders, which even a child will not do accidentally. [BUT NOTHING IS WRONG IN DRAMA!]

At the time, the BKs had chosen to invest in Jagdish Chander and his utter fabrications. It's turned out to be the downfall of what little credibility they might have.

BKWSU is not dependent on any human being, even B Baba or Mama. Even after their departure from their corporeal bodies, it is moving. Moreover as I have said, there are lots of confusions in Murlis itself (for a person who sticks to limited figures and facts), so even if Jagdish Bhai had done perfectly, still these issues would remain as they are.

[fluffy bunny]

You may never have stopped someone doing research but you've never done any. There is a big difference.
I find your approach a bit lazy and, therefore, lacking in integrity.

Which Sevakram? The one who joined to Anti Om Mandli? or....? Thank you for agreeing that there is no way to prove.

It could be either. Taking a position against Lekhraj Kirpalani indulgences in the Om Mandli - which is a matter of fact - it is easy to see how someone with strong spiritual convictions would take a stand against him. To do so would not be "anti-truth", anti-god or anti-spirituality; it would be anti- Lekhraj Kirpalani's massive Maya at that time.

Bear in mind that at this time - and for 20 years - Lekhraj Kirpalani considered himself to be god, enjoyed intimacies with the girls such as kissing and fondling, and had ditched his old wife and taken a young "spiritual" wife.

Who with any spiritual values would not take a stand against that?

As for proofs, you'll have to read up on the original documents. When you do, you'll discover they are as I present them.

Is the BKWSU not a university? If you have not read the course materials, you cannot intelligently take part in the discussion.

There is a 'submission-dominance' dynamic within the BKWSU that all BKs are expected to accept and if they do not, or if they challenge the self-elected leaders too much, they find themselves kicked out as Virendra Dev Dixit was.

Virendra Dev Dixit was right to the extent there was and there remains a lot of misleading confusion and superficiality within the BKWSU, and that it's leaders are mostly dumb and dishonest, it seems to be that he is or was attempting to understand the BK "Knowledge" at a deeper, more metaphorical level.

The BK leaders created the problem by putting themselves between him and the god he believes in and treating him badly. I think they did so as they had lots to hide.

The way the BKs have continued to conspire attempt to destroy Virendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs is an eternal shame ... but useful to the extent it expose the true nature of the Brahma Kumaris. It is very unspiritual, very unenlightened.

[mbbhat]

I find your approach a bit lazy and, therefore, lacking in integrity.

Again, a spiteful personal comment. Who are you to demand or expect from me? Who gave you that right?
I am playing my role in Drama. [I like, and I have carried out churning on Murlis and have presented them here.] But, it is OK.

To do so would not be "anti-truth", anti-god or anti-spirituality; it would be anti- Lekhraj Kirpalani's massive Maya at that time.

The point is- if Sevarkam was head in Bk Yagya for the initial 5 years, how can it be considered to be anti Lekhraj? It should have been anti Sevakram. Simple logic, is it not? Even the newspaper cutting you have put here- viewtopic.php?f=38&t=2617&p=49767#p49767 says FOUNDER of OM Mandli as DL, is it not?

Bear in mind that at this time - and for 20 years - Lekhraj Kirpalani considered himself to be god, enjoyed intimacies with the girls such as kissing and fondling, and had ditched his old wife and taken a young "spiritual" wife.

If you like to believe this, then it strongly opposes the claim of PBKs, saying Sevakram was head of Yagya for 5 years, and the two mothers controlled the entire Yagya, even as Mama and baba. More Lekhraj is highlighted either as hero or villain, PBKs lose their stand on their claims.

BTW, Murli point says DL used to think/search of/for just one God as soon as he left lowkik Gita. Already pointed out to you. See Murli point No. 06 here- in post No. 84- http://www.brahmakumarisforum.net/chat/ ... aa.#p11850
So, to say B baba believed himself to be God does not fit, even if in said documents it is highlighted as God Prajapati Brahma. Murli points clearly say- in the beginning all were like babies, including B baba. And -

67) SM 8-5-85(2):- Baap ne pravesh kiyaa aur isney gaali khaanaa shuru kar dee. ShivBaba ko toh jaante nahin. Na unko gali de saktey hain. Gaali yah khaate hain. KRISHN NE BHI KAHAA NA MAINE MAAKHAN NAHIN KHAAYO. Yah bhi kahte hain kaam toh sab kuch Baba kaa hai, main kuch nahin kartaa hun. Jaadoogaar vah hai. -49 [WOT]
= Father entered, and this one had to bear criticisms. People neither know ShivBaba, nor can criticize HIM. This one bears criticisms ('gaali'). EVEN Krishna SAID- I DID NOT EAT BUTTER, IS IT NOT? EVEN THIS ONE SAYS, ALL THE WORK IS OF (SHIV)BABA. I DO NOT DO ANYTHING. HE (ShivBaba) IS THE MAGICIAN.

So- the magic which ShivBaba has done, that is more important to me than these Mayavi worldly documents. I would churn on these documents on the platform of Murlis, and not individually, in isolation by themselves, with an impure intellect, as you are doing.

Just a point:- This topic is of Sevakram, so better be on topic. Just criticizing B Baba will not help discovering about Sevakram. But, if you really feel they may lead to some truth on this, you may continue to do so.

Is the BKWSU not a university? If you have not read the course materials, you cannot intelligently take part in the discussion.

Murlis are first (after ShivBaba and drama). All the materials are available to me or to any PBKs. So, for discussions with PBKs, Murli is the topmost material.

But, as a lowkik neutral person your way of research is to be appreciated, which can be interesting only to individuals with a similar impure intellect like you; and can have no adverse effect on any true child of God who understands the Murlis correctly and remains in accurate unadulterated remembrance of ShivBaba.

Veerendra Dev Dixit was right to the extent there was and there remains a lot of misleading confusion and superficiality within the BKWSU,

Whatever confusion there may be, he should have criticized, (like you are doing honest approach - say around 50%, at least), as an outside person, who does not believe in Murlis as God's words. That would be OK.

But, if Virendra Dev Dixit or PBKs say Murlis are words of God, then PRIMARILY they should not get affected by any conduct of BKWSU, and then while doing their churning, they should take whole Murlis points - not isolated ones, and TWIST them to suit their own cooked up theory of the 'shooting' of Ravan Rajya.

This is why I say sometimes that you perceive only half, and thus are motivated to argue in a pointless manner, which I sometimes call as LLU, which you prefer to interpret as LLA.

The way the BKs have continued to conspire attempt to destroy Veerendra Dev Dixit and the PBKs is an eternal shame ... but useful to the extent it expose the true nature of the Brahma Kumaris.

That is within Drama and therefore accurate, because concerned senior BKs would face the consequences of any faults which they have committed, as per the Law of Karma, is it not? Moreover due to karmic accounts within Bk circle, as Baba has said, or since it is the Kingdom which is going to be established, these things would obviously take place - nothing to be surprised at all!

But, a great dharna Baba says- past is past, and old points will not come into use. So, BKWSU has done these things with good intention, in at least some issues. I am very happy about that.

But, there is a great utility of PBKs within Drama. That is- God's work will progress in an incognito way.
I will write more about this later.

[fluffy bunny]

If you like to believe this, then it strongly opposes the claim of PBKs, saying Sevakram was head of Yagya for 5 years, and the two mothers controlled the entire Yagya, even as Mama and Baba. More Lekhraj is highlighted either as hero or villain, PBKs lose their stand on their claims.

I am not a PBK, so I cannot defend their claims. There are obviously errors and misinterpretations there too. I am just trying to understand how it all fits together.

I already posted one newspaper article which stated that one major male character had left the Om Mandli ... 1932 to 1937, potentially, that's a possible 5 years of influence ... I could see how there was a difference between being the most influential individual and being the actual leader (or financier) in name. We've all heard about Piyu and the Golden Circle. It's all still a possibility ... but Virendra Dev Dixit appears to have sunk his own boat by depending too much on the BKs' erroneous versions.

I find it difficult to believe any sensible, mature man would go along with Lekhraj Kirpalani's indulgences without urging him to be a little bit more modest and cautious in his interaction with the girls. Unfortunately, we just don't have any reports or original materials from the earlier period and any of the BK leaders who were involved were all just children at the time and it's questionable how much of a grasp on the proceedings and internal dynamics they would have had.

They all were, by definition, Lekhraj Kirpalani bhagats. I think that is also the PBKs point of view. More sensible souls left.

The BK leaders could help us greatly by divulging what they know, and BKs like you could help by demanding the truth form their leaders and researching these things so we can all find a greater truth, and not promote a greater falsehood.

There is so much the BKs could do to help up ... but they choose not to and you choose to conform to the parameters they set, like an Indian accepting and fitting into the caste system for the sakes of their own best interests instead of questioning the caste system and rocking the boat.

It's an understandable sanksar for an Indian to have.